On 11/03/2016 13:04, Gordan Bobic wrote: > On 2016-03-11 12:58, Michael Howard wrote: >> On 11/03/2016 10:38, Gordan Bobic wrote: >>> On 2016-03-11 10:31, Michael Howard wrote: >>>> On 10/03/2016 13:47, Gordan Bobic wrote: >>>>> On 2016-03-10 13:39, Karanbir Singh wrote: >>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>>> >>>>>> On 09/03/16 21:11, Jeremiah Rothschild wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:05:08PM +0000, Michael Howard wrote: >>>>>>>> On 04/03/2016 11:47, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 11:06:08AM +0700, Phong Vo wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In theory, you just need to convert CentOS vmlinuz to uImage, >>>>>>>>>> then do U-boot boot using the dtb and CentOS initrd.img; but >>>>>>>>>> somehow it hangs on me. I'll need to dig into it further. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am not aware that it was shipped only with U-boot. If you >>>>>>>>>> want to try with UEFI, take it from my dropbox >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20403943/mp30ar0_tianocore_bina >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> ries.tar.xz >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> mp30ar0_tianocore_media.img: burn to SPI NOR if you want to >>>>>> replace U-bo >>>>>> ot >>>>>>>>>> permanently >>>>>>>>> Has anyone tried this step ^^ (replacing u-boot permanently)? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not too keen to brick an $800 board. Is it reversible? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No, not tried it, don't see the point of risking it at the mo. >>>>>>>> Somebody did brick their board >>>>>>>> (https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/arm-dev/2016-February/001622.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>> ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> and for me, I just chainload tianocore from u-boot via tftp. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Indeed - that was me! Fun times. I'm all up & running on CentOS 7.2 >>>>>>> now, though, thanks to the help of you fine folks on here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One thing I did change was to not boot via TFTP since I'd rather >>>>>>> not have booting dependent on network availability. Instead I'm >>>>>>> loading via SD. It was pretty straight forward but, in case anyone >>>>>>> else is interested, I replaced the load_tianocore variable like so >>>>>>> (assuming dev 0, part 1): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> setenv load_tianocore 'fatload mmc 0:1 0x82000000 >>>>>>> mp30ar0_tianocore_ubt.fd; fatload mmc 0:1 0x1d000000 >>>>>>> mp30ar0_tianocore_sec_ubt.fd' >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stoked. Thanks again, guys! >>>>>> >>>>>> I was wondering if one of you guys might be willing to own/submit a >>>>>> wiki page article around this board, howto get rolling with >>>>>> CentOS etc ? >>>>> >>>>> I was planning to do just that this weekend when I get mine up and >>>>> running. :-) >>>>> >>>>> I am very much in favour of the way Jeremiah has his set up, though. >>>>> Having u-boot as the stage 1 bootloade before TianoCore UEFI adds a >>>>> lot more flexibility at the relatively trivial expense of adding a >>>>> seconds or two to the boot time. >>>>> >>>> >>>> 5 seconds only to be precise, at least on my board :) >>> >>> Is that because the interactive boot keypress timeout on u-boot >>> defaults to 5 seconds? I ask because that is actually adjustable. :-) >>> >> :) no, that was just coincidence. I was actually referring to 5 secs >> being the difference between tftp and mmc loading. I haven't burned >> UEFI permanently. > > Oh, I see. I was always intending to have UEFI on MMC. I only ever > use TFTP when setting up diskless machines with NFS root or for > unbricking. I'll be using mmc in this case too, despite it being a tad slower, as my stupid netgear switches don't not like LAG(Port Trunking) outside of an OS. -- Mike Howard